reviews. the standard remains the same. this is an effective today. it is comparable to european standards. it is not as though they came up with a study in 1986, put it in a box and decided that would forever be the standard for radio emission frequencies. it is an ongoing review area for various federal government departments that are looking at it. is the gold standard? i did not say that. it is the standard that the federal government determines is safe. they continue to review that standard on a regular basis. >> i had just one follow-up to the supervisor of's question. your study was paid for by t-mo

bile. i assume you would stand behind that study. >> the issue here is the measurements. my metred does not know who is paying me and telling me to take the measurements. we sent notices to anybody that lives within 25 feet of an antenna and offered to take measurements. i put the meter together and i hand it to the resident. they go wherever they want in their house. that meter is a calibrated meter. we report that the existing levels are x. that is independent of who is paying for that. the department of public health has a similarly calibrated meter. our results are similar to theirs. >> the reason i ask the question is that supervisor mar referred

to a discussion that the city had been having about a master plan. from my perspective, i think that we could probably move this forward if we were able to get some funding that the city could use. it was not necessarily an industry sponsored set of studies. something that we as a city could move west. as a representative of t-mobile, what would your thoughts be on moving forward with something like that? >> all of the carriers are struggling. anything that would constitute a working relationship between the city and the industry to try to come up with solutions of how we could better serve the community with least in packs would be favored by the industry. you would suggest that there sponsored or funded by the

industry as well. each carrier has different frequencies and different network build out and requirements. i just want to say that there is federal law that says that a community cannot dictate the kind of technology that is used by an entity to provide coverage to its customers. that being said, i know that paulo also will be having workshops on providing service in palo alto. that is something that the industry favors. they provide service for these wonderful services that changed our lives. they are not in the business of scaring people about radiation. this is something that the industry is in favor of. in the past, we have tried to

sponsor assistance in the planning department. this would not be a new request. >> thank you. in order to alleviate some of these figures f --rears, it would be important to have the these including studies by t- mobile. thank you very much. why do we not go to members of the public who support the project sponsor? if you could please line up? step up to the center aisle. we will hear from the first speaker, please. please step up. please step up. >> good evening, supervisors.

this is important to me. in the north beach area, they have a high school and middle school involved. this is very important. i will support in the north beach area. thank you. >> good evening, supervisors. i am in the chinatown, long beach area. i am a cell phone user. i spend a lot of time in long

beach and chinatown. sometimes they do not work good in the area, especially at my restaurant. the signal is even cut off. it affects our community. honorable supervisors kamala please do something about this. -- honorable supervisors, please do something about this. in the case of emergencies. so many seniors are in the chinatown area. on the hill, people do not have to look at antennas.

please, no more delays. thank you for your consideration. >> good evening, supervisors. we have a specialty general contractor. we are located on third street. we are the telecommunication workers that make yourself ands -- cell phones work. we employ roughly 120 employees. we are a union contractor. we love these jobs. in the 16 years, we have never

had health damage from rf exposures. for the general public, there is roughly zero risk. the cordless phone provides 150 times as much radiofrequency exposure as do these micro antennas. baby monitors provide as much as 10 times more exposure. the last keynote is that the construction industry has very huge unemployment. we need jobs. that is all i have got to say. >> good evening, supervisors. i am the district four residents.

i am a due paying electrician. i have a local business started 30 years ago. not only do these projects employ the telecommunications workers, but also a very important part of our business model. we appreciate the jobs and the chance for our businesses to succeed. >> hello. i am the resident of san francisco. it should be evident that the planning commission shows what rf planning commission does. i am a san francisco geek. no matter what cell phone service i have, it is not as good as people across the nation or across the pond.

i hope that we can build the tower so that we can get the fastest speeds. when we have travellers coming in in 2012, they should get the best service possible. it is not just about making phone calls. it is texting. many people have their iphones ready to use. hopefully, everybody get five bars. >> i am a native san francisco in. -- san franciscan. i am not an expert on wireless utilities. i do know about the planning code. i urge you to reject the appeal. it is absurd to require others to seek an antenna that that is only 30 inches in size.

i would like to provide for an exemption for the construction of these small structures. these are realistic commercial buildings of 10,000 square feet or more. the guidelines specifically exempt utilities. there are no unusual circumstances here. there are buildings all over town. they have approved many similar antennas. we need better wireless infrastructure. the signal capacity is rapidly used up. many people my age do not use land lines. please support the planning department. thank you very much.

>> good evening, supervisors. i lived in district 3, but not in telegraph hill or in north beach. i publish a newsletter for people that used water or facebook. they went to the planning commission meeting a couple of months back. i came here tonight to ask you to deny the appeal. i was looking very carefully at all of the arguments. i feel like i have learned a lot. i do not see where the argument is for the appeal. in terms of the cumulative effect, we learned that there is a lot being done. it seems to me that t-mobile followed the rules you layed out. you say, officer, i stopped at the light. he said, that is the law com.

nobody could argue against greater analysis or a city-wide plan. you do not have one yet. stop denying micro sites while you try to find the funding for a citywide plan. what a massive failure you are admitting to. they cannot provide mobile connectivity for a year or so. i heard the argument that the opposite of cumulative, this power is not essential. i do not understand how that could be a suitable guidelines in this area. i would urge you to deny the appeal. san francisco is not the leader in cities for this type of business. it is an urban legend.

in new york city, they put these on the building appeals. >> next speaker. >> my name is james bishop. i am san francisco native born and raised. i come here on a daily basis. people come to my store saying how much they love t-moblile service. we do not have service in my house. we are working on it and we are trying to provide service. i ask you guys to reject this. >> my name in asregina. i live over in north beach. not too far away from where this dummy antenna is. you can barely see it from the

street. t-mobile is a great company. we need the jobs. we need them to bring in the business in this community. they are complying with federal regulations. they take into consideration that in 2013, the america's cup is coming to san francisco. you will be inundated with so many people throughout the world that can connect with other people throughout the world. they are going to need a good reception. they are going to need to be able to connect with other people that are watching the america's cup. it is extremely important to have good coverage throughout the city. t-mobile has always been in

compliance with the city. the supervisors and the county of san francisco gave t-mobile certification honoring t-mobile on their commitment to the community. that is for after-school programs to keep kids out of gangs. they will be able to have some sort of objective so that they could have some sort of direction. >> thank you. next speaker. >> i am here speaking on behalf

of the vice-chair person of the united residents. members of the san francisco board of supervisors, you are -- we oppose the antenna project, also known as 1653 grant. the united residence of polk is a registered neighborhood association in san francisco. we write in opposition of the micro cell proposed. we believed it is unreasonable

to require an environmental impact report of a tiny antenna out that this just 30 inches tall. this will be enclosed in a rooftop that is just 5 feet in height and obscured from view by casual observers. reluctant the latest set a dangerous precedent that could harm all neighborhoods and businesses and property owners that are seeking to build or expand with minor improvements. we believe this will be a waste of the city resources as well and not reasonable at these times in the bad economy. we support t-mobile site because it expands the wireless network.

>> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good evening, board of supervisors. my name is smith. i live here in the city. i think we deserve quality wireless service. it is hard for some people to be here this afternoon to come to city hall. i would like to read the following letter from someone who was unable to be here today. i am a homeowner in north beach. i am surgeon on the emergency call to sf hospitals and real- life ont-mobile telephone service and to respond to life- threatening emergencies. >>signs are not permitted here in the chamber. it is a list of names of folks

that support t-mobile here. >> i request that you facilitate the improvement in the network so that i might provide for my patients. the think that i might miss a life or death call the city bureaucracy hinders the network is unacceptable to me. thank you. >> and next speaker. >> good evening, supervisors. we support the micro cell antenna proposal. we urge you to deny the appeal. this appeal was sent in for the neighborhood and citywide. we need the cell phone and tend not to do business. san francisco should not

handicap itself by getting behind on communication technology. there is no evidence of environmental impacts. the planning commission has already approved the antenna. please deny the appeal. think you very much for your time. -- thank you very much for your time. >> good evening, board of supervisors. my name is steve ike. my company does aerospace engineering work for nasa. my understanding is that t- mobile has met all the requirements. i heard the testimony from the planning commission earlier that supports some of their plans, which includes making sure that this meets the health standards.

the talk about the rf commissions, etc. it is common knowledge that the s.e.c. -- the fcc will not approve any of these intense as if there is anything health-was wrong with it. it is not harmful to humans. that is what science proves to us. it is also not harmful to the wildlife, as someone quoted earlier. i think it is about quality of life. we'll have cell phones. we have pdas. most of what we do today, we rely on these phones. we also rely on the pga -- the pda device is to reach our information. it has become part of our lives. i think it is no longer a luxury.

in third world countries, most of them do not have direct calls. it is the same in some areas of san francisco. i think this project will improve the quality of life of san franciscans, especially those that use pda devices and cell phones. i urge the board to support the implementation of this project. it makes good business sense and is also the right thing to do. thank you. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, supervisors. it has been a long day. i appreciate all of you staying here to listen to all of us. my name is ron lee. i worked for at&t for 30 years. i worked around these cell sites, radio towers up in the san bruno mountains. i used to stand next to them all day long. i am living proof.

i am not sick. i do not have cancer. none of the bad stuff people talk about has happened to me. my co-workers -- i do not know any of them that ever got sick from being on a cell site or radio tower. i just want to point that out. i am living proof. it has never affected me or any of my co-workers. i hope that you will deny this appeal and let everybody in the neighborhood have full-service so we have reliable cell phone service throughout the whole north beach area. thank you very much. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> my name is mike lee. i have been a resident for 10 years. i am also a retail business owner very close to the site. a lot of my customers are now starting to use technology to

incorporate wi-fi purchasing processes. i hope you guys do not stand in the way of that future technology. i am concerned about this issue, and personally collected 120 signatures of my fellow merchants. i got this approval with their signatures. it says as merchants working and living in the north beach area, we do not oppose this. i urge you on the high court -- on behalf of this project to deny this appeal and carry forward the project progress. >> good evening, supervisors. my name is marsha garland. i am a 35-year resident of north beach and a business owner for the same time. i am probably the first person

in my generation to eliminate her land line. when i first did that four or five months ago, everybody was very concerned for me. actually, i totally rely on my cellphone. we have had enough studies done. the engineers and the department of health agreed there is not a safety problem. each antenna site is monitored, as you have heard, every two years to ensure they meet federal safety guidelines. if the cumulative radio frequencies were to increase a lot, they would have to change the antenna. that is not a problem, because they are low-powered antennas anyway. if we are going to study these, we might as well start studying microwave ovens, electric blankets, and cell phones, which most people seem to be attached to. there has been enough study. there should not be any more

delays. delays cost us money and we are in a budget crunch. i think we should just get along with this. i hope you will approve and uphold the planning commission decision back in february. thank you. >> good evening, supervisors. my name is stefano. i spent about 20 years doing community civic work in the north beach area. i am a member of north beach -- north beach neighbors and north beach merchants. i went door to door to try to do the out reach that was required. one thing that i did discover was that this decision, although it is for grant avenue , has a significant impact on the whole city. that is why it is before you today. in the short time, we were able

to get letters asking to deny the appeal from the alliance for a better district 6, which is jane kim's district, the mission district business improvement association, the jackson historic district association, the inner sunset group, the terrible park -- the taravel park merchant association. the city did an excellent job in the study and showed that the project sponsor met all the requirements the city has asked. there is also federal requirements that were met. this is something that is not done overnight. it takes about three years in san francisco. i urge you to deny the appeal. support the planning commission. this is a thorough and comprehensive thing.

thank you. >> i am dave cruz. i am a resident of district 2. well this is not in my backyard, i wanted to speak on behalf of public safety. i am a public safety professional. i do wireless for a living. i do not typically take sides and am not taking a side for this project. i think somebody really needed to answer your question, supervisor mar, about why so many antennas. unfortunately, t-mobile did not do a good job of answering. it is because these received. the big powers are not transferring as much as they are receiving. to be able to listen to you when you say, "can you hear me now," when you are in a closet, calling 911 -- that tiny signal coming from your phone is trying